The Supreme Court case that could impact the homeless coast-to-coast

With foothills towering above, Boise, Idaho, is a beautiful place. But it was the less picturesque neighborhoods, the cul-de-sacs and the back alleys of the city that were Robert Martin’s home, on and off, for 15 years. On nights when Boise’s homeless shelters were full, Martin slept wherever he could. “There were times when I slept on garage stairs, on cement, I slept on rocks, under overpasses on rocks and in the dirt,” he said.

But in Boise, sleeping or camping on public property was against the law. Martin was one of many fined for sleeping in public.

Howard Belodoff of Idaho Legal Aid Services saw a constitutional issue in Boise’s camping law and turned it into a federal case. “I thought Robert’s case was actually a vivid portrayal of the situation that homeless people find themselves in,” Belodoff said. “Here’s a guy, he has nowhere to sleep. He was walking around all night ’cause he was told you can’t quote, quote campingwhich just means you can’t have a blanket around you.”

In 2009, in Federal Court, Belodoff filed a lawsuit that became known as Martin v.arguing that the city of Boise violated the Constitution’s 8th Amendment prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment by leaving those without a home to legally sleep in.

“It’s ‘cruel and unusual’ in the truest sense of the word,” Belodoff said, “because every one of us – rich, poor, old, young, male, female – needs sleep.”

Nine years later, the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with Belodoff, writing that it considered whether “the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment prohibits a city from criminally prosecuting people for sleeping on public property.” and concluding “that does.”

San Francisco Mayor London Breed Held Responsible Martin v. to worsen the city’s crisis. The court order prohibits San Francisco from clearing sidewalk encampments unless the city can guarantee a place to sleep for every person it displaces — a challenge in a city with more than 8,000 homeless people and fewer than 4,000 shelter beds.

Nationally there is a lack of shelter beds; according to HUD 2021 Annual Homeless Assessment Reportaround 188,000 more people need shelter than the number of beds available.

But the Martin v. the ruling applies only to the nine western states under the 9th Circuit’s jurisdiction. Elsewhere in the country, 14 states have laws that make it a crime to camp in public places, and 27 states have anti-loitering and loitering laws that can be used to transport those sleeping in public.

This type of law has been effectively banned in the 9th Circuit states.

“What the 9th Circuit said is that a person cannot be punished for being homeless if there are no adequate shelters or places for them to go,” said Erwin Chemerinsky, a leading constitutional scholar and dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law. .

Blackstone asked, “The 8th Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment, we think of it as applying to death penalty cases, for example. How can it be applied to the homeless?”

“In 1962, the United States Supreme Court said it is cruel and unusual punishment to punish someone for status,” Chemerinsky said. “In this case, they said you can’t punish someone for being a drug addict; you punish someone if they are using or possessing drugs, but not because they are addicted. said, you can’t punish someone for being homeless.”

Since the homeless cannot be denied a place to sleep, Mayor Kate Colin of San Rafael, California, is almost powerless to move the person living in a tent next to City Hall. Shelters here are often full, meaning this suburban city of 60,000 can legally do little about the encampments on its streets.

“Every time we passed a law, we were sued immediately or within the time frame in which that could happen,” Colin said.

She said it’s frustrating to explain to voters that people camping in the streets can’t be displaced: “People don’t want to hear that San Rafael doesn’t have the independent capacity to work with our homeless community,” she said.

Although many cities complain Martin v., Grants Pass, Oregon, is doing something. The city appealed to the Supreme Court.

When the case was argued in April, homeless advocates demonstrated outside the courtroom, while inside, attorney Theane Evangelis (representing Grants Pass) urged the judges to overturn Martin v.. She told the court: “It would be a disaster if Martin remained registered in any way.”

Evangelis said Grants Pass became central to the case after it was sued by a group of plaintiffs: “[They] claimed it would be cruel and unusual punishment for Grants Pass to enforce local camping laws.

The Supreme Court ruling, expected this month, could impact homelessness policy across the country,

Evangelis said, “All of us who live here in the 9th Circuit have seen the effects firsthand of these decisions. And that’s why if the Supreme Court agreed with the 9th Circuit, these conditions would spread to the rest of the country. And that would be the opposite of solving this problem.”

Dean Chemerinsky said, “On the other hand, I think there’s such a compelling argument on behalf of what the 9th Circuit said, that you can’t make something a crime if there’s no alternative.”

So what’s at stake in the Supreme Court’s decision? Chemerinsky said, “For the homeless, the question is: Will they face criminal punishment because they have no other place to live? For cities, the question would be: What can cities legally do to address their homeless population? And for the Constitution, the question is: what will this mean for the 8th Amendment?”

Robert Martin no longer lives on the streets, but his thoughts remain with those still looking for places to sleep: “Being homeless should never be considered an illegal act,” he said. “Being homeless is an unforeseen and unfortunate circumstance.”

For Howard Belodoff, the lawyer who started it all, the case is not just about the rights of the homeless, but also about their humanity. “They feel so helpless because no one listens and no one cares,” he said. “For the first time they feel like a person and are recognized.”

For more information:

Story produced by Chris Weicher. Editor: Ben McCormick.

See too: